PullRequest Blog

I used https://www.pullrequest.com just to pay someone else to look at my code and make suggestions. Aside from just the normal nitpick styling stuff, they usually have decent architecture suggestions and help you avoid making costly mistakes. It's not cheap, but my project is a full time effort that makes money and I found it worthwhile.

Not affiliated, but there are services like PullRequest[0] that do code review as a service -- it might be worth doing this in your situation to cut out the overhead of trying to find someone qualified. Disclaimer: haven't used them yet, so can't comment on quality. [0] https://www.pullrequest.com/

Check out https://codereview.stackexchange.com/ or the code review subreddits. If you follow their posting guidelines you're likely to get feedback on how to improve your (working) code. I recommend you start with the free options above, but if you need more in-depth feedback we offer paid code review at https://www.pullrequest.com. It's code review as a service for every popular language that can help you improve your code quality.

> I have a feeling this is just another way to get cheap labour. You make it sound like it’s a Bad Thing (TM). The apprentices that sign up for this gain real world experience that’s hard to come by locally and get paid for it. This kind of extended apprenticeship is valuable as they can go on to land remote jobs that pay them better than their local market. Perhaps they could have worded that more clearly as: “we recruit devs . . . from low-income countries with English as their official language” This is how they are able to make the economics work. EDIT: https://www.pullrequest.com/ is a comparable service (where you involve “outsiders” with your codebase) except they use senior devs rather than junior devs. Of course senior devs are more farther along in their careers so it is clear you are paying for their experience.

Thanks for the thread. I am loking for a part time business person/CEO. I am a tech guy. Have 15+ years experience building backend systems. Now, I build user facing websites/services and release them. I have no knowledge of marketing/sales, so if you are a non tech guy who wants to do some fun projects, hit me up. Email in profile. Currently, I am working on a website where people can post their code and ask for feedback. (Something http://pullrequest.com/) Note that these are mostly side projects. Unless you are very good, they will be side projects for now :)

https://www.pullrequest.com/ I’ve heard about them after they acquire the freelance platform https://moonlightwork.com.

You could try posting the snippets you need peer reviewed here on code review stack exchange - https://codereview.stackexchange.com I recently came across https://www.pullrequest.com and have heard good things about them.

I've used a tool similar to what you've described here called https://www.pullrequest.com/ for code review, though it's fairly new IIRC and not cheap.

The only service I've seen for this is https://www.pullrequest.com/. Seems more for teams but it may work.

https://www.pullrequest.com - Can't personally vouch for this, since I haven't used it, but seems to be an option.

You should edit the submission description to make https://www.pullrequest.com/ a clickable link. I've seen that done for other Launch HN submissions.

And also: https://www.pullrequest.com/

"All of our employees, contractors, and reviewers are based in the US and Canada. " https://www.pullrequest.com/faq/

Why would anyone ever apply to a place that has such a graph on its website? https://www.pullrequest.com/images/figures/reviewers/screening-graph.p… From a customer perspective, and if it's really true they probably will have to lower their standards to serve you too.

Interesting... If someone wants to know more about what a readability approver does: https://www.pullrequest.com/blog/google-code-review-readability-certif…

Based on [1]; readability in google means you've been certified to review code according to Google's code style in a given language. Seems like if you've been certified you don't need an extra person who has been certified in 'readability' to review your code so it makes it easier. 1) https://www.pullrequest.com/blog/google-code-review-readability-certif…

I agree with what I think is your argument that “bureaucratic” tools used at a company with many thousands of engineers aren’t necessarily appropriate for a much smaller company. For example, the system of ownership by directory in a monorepo alluded to in other comments is unnecessary if you have a handful of engineers or a few dozen. Or the system like their “readability” reviews that you can read about elsewhere online (eg https://www.pullrequest.com/blog/google-code-review-readability-certif… It’s when you get to a bigger size that you (probably) need to worry these cases.

FWIW, and definitely somewhat off-topic, when they say code is reviewed "twice," they don't mean necessarily literally. When someone gets "readability" in a language, they can approve changes in that language for readability; if neither the reviewer nor the person writing the code yet have readability in a given language, they will need someone who does to approve it in addition. The idea is to have someone who has pretty good knowledge of the style and conventions used for a given language to have reviewed it. More information is available on the net if you're curious. A cursory Duck Duck Go leads me here: https://www.pullrequest.com/blog/google-code-review-readability-certif…